KWR Quote, Financials, Valuation and Earnings

Minerals Technologies has a net margin of 3.19% compared to Quaker Houghton's net margin of 10.42%. Quaker Houghton's return on equity of 8.36% beat Minerals Technologies's return on equity of 9.71%.

Quaker Houghton has a consensus price target of $154.17, signalling upside risk potential of 49.47%. On the other hand Minerals Technologies has an analysts' consensus of $93.25 which suggests that it could grow by 62.03%. Given that Minerals Technologies has higher upside potential than Quaker Houghton, analysts believe Minerals Technologies is more attractive than Quaker Houghton.

Quaker Houghton has a beta of 1.438, which suggesting that the stock is 43.848% more volatile than S&P 500. In comparison Minerals Technologies has a beta of 1.249, suggesting its more volatile than the S&P 500 by 24.905%.

Quaker Houghton has a quarterly dividend of $0.49 per share corresponding to a yield of 1.85%. Minerals Technologies offers a yield of 0.73% to investors and pays a quarterly dividend of $0.11 per share. Quaker Houghton pays 28.44% of its earnings as a dividend. Minerals Technologies pays out 7.9% of its earnings as a dividend. Both of these payout ratios are sufficient to cover dividend payouts with earnings for the foreseeable future.

Quaker Houghton quarterly revenues are $444.1M, which are smaller than Minerals Technologies quarterly revenues of $518.1M. Quaker Houghton's net income of $14.2M is lower than Minerals Technologies's net income of $54M. Notably, Quaker Houghton's price-to-earnings ratio is 15.87x while Minerals Technologies's PE ratio is 11.09x. Generally a lower price-to-earnings ratio signals a stock is trading at a lower multiple of earnings and is a better value. Another key metric is the price-to-sales ratio, which for Quaker Houghton is 1.00x versus 0.88x for Minerals Technologies. Usually stocks with elevated PS ratios are considered overvalued.

Ingevity has a net margin of 3.19% compared to Quaker Houghton's net margin of 5.56%. Quaker Houghton's return on equity of 8.36% beat Ingevity's return on equity of -113.59%.

Quaker Houghton has a consensus price target of $154.17, signalling upside risk potential of 49.47%. On the other hand Ingevity has an analysts' consensus of $49.75 which suggests that it could grow by 56.15%. Given that Ingevity has higher upside potential than Quaker Houghton, analysts believe Ingevity is more attractive than Quaker Houghton.

Quaker Houghton has a beta of 1.438, which suggesting that the stock is 43.848% more volatile than S&P 500. In comparison Ingevity has a beta of 1.544, suggesting its more volatile than the S&P 500 by 54.443%.

Quaker Houghton has a quarterly dividend of $0.49 per share corresponding to a yield of 1.85%. Ingevity offers a yield of 0% to investors and pays a quarterly dividend of $0.00 per share. Quaker Houghton pays 28.44% of its earnings as a dividend. Ingevity pays out -- of its earnings as a dividend. Quaker Houghton's payout ratio is sufficient to cover dividend payouts with earnings for the foreseeable future.

Quaker Houghton quarterly revenues are $444.1M, which are larger than Ingevity quarterly revenues of $298.8M. Quaker Houghton's net income of $14.2M is lower than Ingevity's net income of $16.6M. Notably, Quaker Houghton's price-to-earnings ratio is 15.87x while Ingevity's PE ratio is --. Generally a lower price-to-earnings ratio signals a stock is trading at a lower multiple of earnings and is a better value. Another key metric is the price-to-sales ratio, which for Quaker Houghton is 1.00x versus 0.82x for Ingevity. Usually stocks with elevated PS ratios are considered overvalued.

Paramount Gold Nevada has a net margin of 3.19% compared to Quaker Houghton's net margin of --. Quaker Houghton's return on equity of 8.36% beat Paramount Gold Nevada's return on equity of --.

Quaker Houghton has a consensus price target of $154.17, signalling upside risk potential of 49.47%. On the other hand Paramount Gold Nevada has an analysts' consensus of $1.40 which suggests that it could grow by 274.23%. Given that Paramount Gold Nevada has higher upside potential than Quaker Houghton, analysts believe Paramount Gold Nevada is more attractive than Quaker Houghton.

Quaker Houghton has a beta of 1.438, which suggesting that the stock is 43.848% more volatile than S&P 500. In comparison Paramount Gold Nevada has a beta of 1.856, suggesting its more volatile than the S&P 500 by 85.622%.

Quaker Houghton has a quarterly dividend of $0.49 per share corresponding to a yield of 1.85%. Paramount Gold Nevada offers a yield of 0% to investors and pays a quarterly dividend of $0.00 per share. Quaker Houghton pays 28.44% of its earnings as a dividend. Paramount Gold Nevada pays out -- of its earnings as a dividend. Quaker Houghton's payout ratio is sufficient to cover dividend payouts with earnings for the foreseeable future.

Quaker Houghton quarterly revenues are $444.1M, which are larger than Paramount Gold Nevada quarterly revenues of --. Quaker Houghton's net income of $14.2M is higher than Paramount Gold Nevada's net income of -$2M. Notably, Quaker Houghton's price-to-earnings ratio is 15.87x while Paramount Gold Nevada's PE ratio is --. Generally a lower price-to-earnings ratio signals a stock is trading at a lower multiple of earnings and is a better value. Another key metric is the price-to-sales ratio, which for Quaker Houghton is 1.00x versus -- for Paramount Gold Nevada. Usually stocks with elevated PS ratios are considered overvalued.

Rayonier Advanced Materials has a net margin of 3.19% compared to Quaker Houghton's net margin of -3.84%. Quaker Houghton's return on equity of 8.36% beat Rayonier Advanced Materials's return on equity of -5.27%.

Quaker Houghton has a consensus price target of $154.17, signalling upside risk potential of 49.47%. On the other hand Rayonier Advanced Materials has an analysts' consensus of $10.00 which suggests that it could grow by 130.95%. Given that Rayonier Advanced Materials has higher upside potential than Quaker Houghton, analysts believe Rayonier Advanced Materials is more attractive than Quaker Houghton.

Quaker Houghton has a beta of 1.438, which suggesting that the stock is 43.848% more volatile than S&P 500. In comparison Rayonier Advanced Materials has a beta of 2.861, suggesting its more volatile than the S&P 500 by 186.088%.

Quaker Houghton has a quarterly dividend of $0.49 per share corresponding to a yield of 1.85%. Rayonier Advanced Materials offers a yield of 0% to investors and pays a quarterly dividend of $0.00 per share. Quaker Houghton pays 28.44% of its earnings as a dividend. Rayonier Advanced Materials pays out -- of its earnings as a dividend. Quaker Houghton's payout ratio is sufficient to cover dividend payouts with earnings for the foreseeable future.

Quaker Houghton quarterly revenues are $444.1M, which are larger than Rayonier Advanced Materials quarterly revenues of $422.5M. Quaker Houghton's net income of $14.2M is higher than Rayonier Advanced Materials's net income of -$16.2M. Notably, Quaker Houghton's price-to-earnings ratio is 15.87x while Rayonier Advanced Materials's PE ratio is --. Generally a lower price-to-earnings ratio signals a stock is trading at a lower multiple of earnings and is a better value. Another key metric is the price-to-sales ratio, which for Quaker Houghton is 1.00x versus 0.18x for Rayonier Advanced Materials. Usually stocks with elevated PS ratios are considered overvalued.